Project description:Most bone develops either by intramembranous ossification where bone forms within a soft connective tissue, or by endochondral ossification by way of a cartilage anlagen or model. Bones of the skull can form endochondrally or intramembranously or represent a combination of the two types of ossification. Contrary to the classical definition of intramembranous ossification, we have previously described a tight temporo-spatial relationship between cranial cartilages and dermal bone formation and proposed a mechanistic relationship between chondrocranial cartilage and dermal bone. Here, we further investigate this relationship through an analysis of how cells organize to form cranial cartilages and dermal bone. Using Wnt1-Cre2 and Mesp1-Cre transgenic mice, we determine the derivation of cells that comprise cranial cartilages from either cranial neural crest (CNC) or paraxial mesoderm (PM). We confirm a previously determined CNC-PM boundary that runs through the hypophyseal fenestra in the cartilaginous braincase floor and identify four additional CNC-PM boundaries in the chondrocranial lateral wall, including a boundary that runs along the basal and apical ends of the hypochiasmatic cartilage. Based on the knowledge that as osteoblasts differentiate from CNC- and PM-derived mesenchyme, the differentiating cells express the transcription factor genes RUNX2 and osterix (OSX), we created a new transgenic mouse line called R2Tom. R2Tom mice carry a tdTomato reporter gene joined with an evolutionarily well-conserved enhancer sequence of RUNX2. R2Tom mice crossed with Osx-GFP mice yield R2Tom;Osx-GFP double transgenic mice in which various stages of osteoblasts and their precursors are detected with different fluorescent reporters. We use the R2Tom;Osx-GFP mice, new data on the cell derivation of cranial cartilages, histology, immunohistochemistry, and detailed morphological observations combined with data from other investigators to summarize the differentiation of cranial mesenchyme as it forms condensations that become chondrocranial cartilages and associated dermal bones of the lateral cranial wall. These data advance our previous findings of a tendency of cranial cartilage and dermal bone development to vary jointly in a coordinated manner, promoting a role for cranial cartilages in intramembranous bone formation.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough coma is commonly encountered in critical care, worldwide variability exists in diagnosis and management practices. We aimed to assess variability in coma definitions, etiologies, treatment strategies, and attitudes toward prognosis.MethodsAs part of the Neurocritical Care Society Curing Coma Campaign, between September 2020 and January 2021, we conducted an anonymous, international, cross-sectional global survey of health care professionals caring for patients with coma and disorders of consciousness in the acute, subacute, or chronic setting. Survey responses were solicited by sequential emails distributed by international neuroscience societies and social media. Fleiss κ values were calculated to assess agreement among respondents.ResultsThe survey was completed by 258 health care professionals from 41 countries. Respondents predominantly were physicians (n = 213, 83%), were from the United States (n = 141, 55%), and represented academic centers (n = 231, 90%). Among eight predefined items, respondents identified the following cardinal features, in various combinations, that must be present to define coma: absence of wakefulness (81%, κ = 0.764); Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) ≤ 8 (64%, κ = 0.588); failure to respond purposefully to visual, verbal, or tactile stimuli (60%, κ = 0.552); and inability to follow commands (58%, κ = 0.529). Reported etiologies of coma encountered included medically induced coma (24%), traumatic brain injury (24%), intracerebral hemorrhage (21%), and cardiac arrest/hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (11%). The most common clinical assessment tools used for coma included the GCS (94%) and neurological examination (78%). Sixty-six percent of respondents routinely performed sedation interruption, in the absence of contraindications, for clinical coma assessments in the intensive care unit. Advanced neurological assessment techniques in comatose patients included quantitative electroencephalography (EEG)/connectivity analysis (16%), functional magnetic resonance imaging (7%), single-photon emission computerized tomography (6%), positron emission tomography (4%), invasive EEG (4%), and cerebral microdialysis (4%). The most commonly used neurostimulants included amantadine (51%), modafinil (37%), and methylphenidate (28%). The leading determinants for prognostication included etiology of coma, neurological examination findings, and neuroimaging. Fewer than 20% of respondents reported routine follow-up of coma survivors after hospital discharge; however, 86% indicated interest in future research initiatives that include postdischarge outcomes at six (85%) and 12 months (65%).ConclusionsThere is wide heterogeneity among health care professionals regarding the clinical definition of coma and limited routine use of advanced coma assessment techniques in acute care settings. Coma management practices vary across sites, and mechanisms for coordinated and sustained follow-up after acute treatment are inconsistent. There is an urgent need for the development of evidence-based guidelines and a collaborative, coordinated approach to advance both the science and the practice of coma management globally.

Dataset Information

Come Together, HSP♦

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets